On Mixed Forms of Government

Published: August 4, 2022

By: Ramil Alegarbes, BA in Political Science

This paper shall focus solely on Polybius’ arguments referring to the mixed form of government. This philosopher identified the way political systems work and change from the past into the present, and arguably into the future. To be specific, he said that throughout history, the form of government in a state (country) always changes according to the circumstances that the populace is involved in at the present. Meaning, the changes in political structures inevitably take place regularly.

What kind of change is Polybius referring to? First, he talked about the main forms of government: (1) the Monarchy; (2) the Aristocracy; and (3) the Mob rule. In which the first and primary form of government is:

• Monarchy is rule based on force where several people assembling at a particular place expressed their will in favor of a strong man to rule them. When the king defies justice and morality, he becomes a tyrant. The abolition of both monarchy and tyranny clears the way for the emergence of:

• Aristocracy, where the state is ruled by a group of elite individuals. This, by nature, when the elite individuals lose their nationalism and continue to pursue their self-interests degenerates into:

• Oligarchy, where the ruling group becomes driven by money, and when the common people become inflamed by anger on this government for its unjust rule due to inequality and the presence of wide economic separation of the classes will lead to:

• Democracy comes into being when people claim that they must have free access to power and authority and where democratic rights should not be limited only to a few persons. In due course, the license and lawlessness of this form of government produce:

• Mob rule where the majority becomes the tyrant and forsakes the welfare of the minority to a degree.

Forms of government, therefore, are neither permanent nor stable. This is due to the inherent human nature of greed, competition, and power. This further strengthens the claim that “change is the only constant phenomenon in the world.” These changes may be due to development or devolution; however, change speaks for itself and the rejection of this natural phenomenon is equivalent to the rejection of nature itself in its earthly functions.

So, how should countries cope with these changes? Polybius tells us to mix the different forms of government. This idea may sound ridiculous, but the combination of different forms of government is being practiced by many sovereign states although few have claimed it. Even states such as England and Thailand follow a Monarchial Democracy.

In the Philippine setting, through the power vested in the Constitution, the President of the Philippines may appoint whoever he wishes for seats in the cabinet and other government institutions, subject to the confirmation of the Commission on Appointments. The President may even declare martial law as long as he proclaims it according to the Constitution. Those are some characteristics of autocracy. Secondly, although the President may declare martial law, a group of individuals in power may vote to suspend or extend it. This group of individuals in power is called Congress. That is an aspect of aristocracy.

Polybius’ point is that having a mixed form of government will not only let the citizens have an open mind but will also increase the efficiency and effectiveness of governance. There are no perfect systems or forms of government, only when states incorporate the best features of every form of government along with the political maturity of the majority may we even strive to get closer to perfection and deal with the changes in the political structures.

Today, the Philippines is leaning toward Federalism wherein government powers will be spread even further to the local levels to hasten the resolution of local issues, especially economic issues. This progress of change is another example of Polybius’ idea. Will this develop the Philippines into a far greater sovereign state in the future, or will it devolve into a weak state that usurps its citizens and wastes the current economic progress? That is still arguable.